What is the attitude of the democrat when political rights are under discussion?

When it is time to vote, apparently the voter is not to be asked for any guarantee of his wisdom. His will and capacity to choose wisely are taken for granted. Can the people be mistaken? Are we not living in an age of enlightenment? What! Are the people always to be kept on leashes? Have they not won their rights by effort and sacrifice? Have they not given ample proof of their intelligence and wisdom? Are they not adults? Are they not capable of judging for themselves? Do they not know what is best for themselves? Is there a class or a man who would be so bold as to set himself above the people, and judge and act for them? No, no, the people are and should be free. They desire to manage their own affairs, and they shall do so.

But when the legislator is finally elected  ah! Then indeed does the tone of his speech undergo a radical change. The people are returned to passiveness, inertness, and unconsciousness; the legislator enters into omnipotence. Now it is for him to initiate, to direct, to propel, and to organize. Mankind has only to submit; the hour of despotism has struck. We now observe this fatal idea: the people who, during the election, were so wise, so moral, and so perfect, now have no tendencies whatever; or if they have any, they are tendencies that lead downward into degradation. Frederic Bastiat, The Law, pages 60-61

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is maneuvering behind the scenes to defeat a conservative plan aimed at restricting earmarks, setting up a high-stakes showdown that pits the GOP leader and his “Old Bull” allies against Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and a new breed of conservative senators.

Proving we have not voted in vain, that D.C. politicians are beginning to get it that they work for us.

That the people can trust you to carry out our directives as our elected representative.

The American people wanted you to begin dismantling a bloated, corrupt federal government where only the rich and powerful derive any benefit, not to lecture us from your ivory tower about how ignorant we are about your job description.

Lets turn this around and ask the question from another perspective. If you cant accomplish something so allegedly insignificant as cleaning up the federal budget a bit by banning earmarks, how can we trust you will do the right thing when political pressures demand you do heavy lifting on something major?

While some in the GOP insist on maintaining a party full of Old Bull, they incessantly repeat history in a manner that bodes ill for Americas future.

Last January, Republicans as the minority party voted en masse against raising the debt ceiling. One day after the election:

U.S. House Speaker-apparent John Boehner pledged the new House majority would listen to the voters who swept the Republicans into power.

But now, in true Bastiat form, Republicans plan to increase the federal debt ceiling to cover this years $1.5 trillion deficit. They did this without first preparing a plan to streamline a bloated government, not even by banning earmarks.

McConnell and Inhofe need a brief history lesson.

The 2008 elections were a mandate against business as usual under the GOP and Bush. CNN exit polls showed that only 28% thought Bush was doing a good job, and 48% thought McCain — as leader of the Republican Party by nature of his presidential candidacy — would continue Bushs policies.

This was one crucial nail in the GOPs coffin that year.

In 2010, voters didnt vote so much in favor of the Republican Party as against Obamas agenda. Politiconotes: Following their midterm rout of Democrats, Republicans are welcoming a big crop of freshmen who criticized earmarks on the campaign trail … .

Even the BBC admitted that Republicans campaigned with the promise to halt Obamas agenda. The results are historical fact that their promise played well among the electorate.

McConnell and Inhofe should take this reality to heart, before they set dynamics in motion that return America to 2008.

Bite the bullet, elites, and follow the lead of the true Conservatives. (Oh, the MILLIONS in earmarks don’t amount to much, you say?) To the average citizen, a MILLION is a lot, and he is sick of your cavalier attitude about it. Your park barrell, vote-buying attitude no longer works with the tax-paying citizen. The rest of ‘em (welfare queens) are gonna vote Democrat anyway without fail.

At best, McConnell and Inhofe by their actions, may be just like the spoiled little brat “breaking in” a new baby sitter. He will push whatever envelope he can until he finds out where that envelope ends.

So are they just trying to find out just how serious the Tea Parties and the public in genereal comes down on this issue before making the kind of changes that come natural to everyday adults?

At their own peril, 9 Republican Senators are up for re-election in 12 and most of those on that list are RINO establishment types. They had better be well aware the list is active with an already announced Tea Party type primary challenger for Olympia Snowe and I beleive alerady another one I don’t recall at the moment.

Add to the mix that 22 Democrats are up as well, do they really want to deal with a Tea Party movement already in high gear coming in for a pit stop for new skins and a fresh load of fuel?

Being a member of the movement, its impact will be far more reaching than it was in 10 because unlike the stories questioning whether the movement will live on, we are seeing even more new folks calling and coming to see what it is all about. The agendas for the next cycle are already on the table ready for action list items once the holidays have passed and the pit stop is over.

Washington is a company town. The pols that have been there awhile will always work to protect the company, regardless of affiliation. I knew the Congress in '94 wasn't going to do anything of significance when they couldn't even reverse the low-flow toilet law. Looks like more of the same from this bunch.

4
posted on 11/14/2010 4:27:46 AM PST
by Major Matt Mason
(I know more about Christine O'Donnell than I do about Barack Obama.)

I think banning earmarks are an important step in cleaning up this mess.

As I understand it.....
They are of course used to augment various legislation providing special funding or permissions to lawmakers pet projects..securing their vote on a new draft even if they dont agree with it?....

Is it also the method by which “favors” are accounted..over time? Like an official record of favors done...like a casino chip...to be used to buy other favors at a later time?

As such “since they cant remember accurately exactly when or how they sold out on this issue or that”...these earmarks are very important to the culture of corruption in our gov.?

CALLING ALL TEA PARTY PATRIOTS: It’s time to set our sights on McConnell and Inhofe. Neither are up for reelection in 2012. So, what do we need to do to get McConnell dethroned from any GOP leadership roll in the Senate?

Just like the White House issues a trial baloon in support of extending the existing tax structure then Obama himself saying he is against it? Yea, right. Never go against logic no matter who it is that says they are for it. When the rubber meets the road, he will nuance another position on it in seven different ways, in essence voting Present again.

Considering Inhofe’s voting record and the fact that he’s a great guy, we’re pretty much out of Senators once we call him a RINO - we have to think a bit more about what’s he’s getting at.

His point is that people closer to the action should have some say on how federal money is spent...not Obama.

My answer is fine - and you can thank TED STEVENS and JOHN MCCAIN for giving earmarks their reputation. Game over Inhofe, you are probably right, but let it go...you are a great Senator - but this is not the time for Republicans to be defending earmarks.

12
posted on 11/14/2010 5:36:14 AM PST
by BobL
(The whole point of being human is knowing when the party's over.)

Washington is a company town. The pols that have been there awhile will always work to protect the company, regardless of affiliation. I knew the Congress in '94 wasn't going to do anything of significance when they couldn't even reverse the low-flow toilet law. Looks like more of the same from this bunch.

+100.

This country's budget is a disaster and the new majority is promising to barely nibble at the solution. Even if there was an ironclad pledge to shut a whole agency every year, it would barely scratch the surface of what is needed. A fully 10% of the US GDP is government spending on borrowed money, and the GOP leadership is attacking, what, .01% of it?

There will be no leadership from politicians to greatly shrink the size of the federal behemoth. There is going to have to be a bond crisis to wake the electorate up. What this election did was to seek out a different credit counsellor, not to actually pay the bills. The voters want some way to stiff the creditors and still have access to their loans. Most Republicans are just playing along, and stringing things out to their own personal advantages. Hardly anything has changed, sad to say.

The actual amount of money spent on earmarks, aka Pork Barrel, is minuscule compared to the total spending ..but..
It’s symbolic of frivolous wasteful spending.

Like the neighbor who is out of work, collectors beating on their door and they go out and buy a 60”LED Tv.

How many times have we heard, ‘$500,000 for the mating habits of earwigs’, or ‘ millions for the bridge to nowhere’.

I just checked out John Murtha airport in Johnstown, PA. His favorite ‘earmark’. Any pictures I’ve seen of the terminal depicted it as empty of passengers.
United flies 4 arrivals/day and the same number departures. Yet it’s a first class facility, paid for by guess who.
The fact sheets at the homepage try to defend the airport’s subsidy by pointing out their subsidy is less than that of Ely, NV’s airport.
Nevada...wonder how they got such a large earmark. Hmmm

You are so right. I understand they are closer to the situation. I also know that they can vote NO on a bill if it isn’t specific as to intent. It will be more work as everything will have to be extremely fine tuned before it is brought to vote, but that should be business as usual anyway. Riders and earmarks (same thing?) have been identified as the beginning of taking control of spending. We must succeed on this to prove how serious we are!

These guys will never give up earmarks willingly. Half of them run on earmarks. They tell the folks back home that their opponent will never bring home the bacon like they can. Getting rid of earmarks is like getting gum off the bottom of your shoe.

While I’d love to see earmarks as currently used abolished and banned, I’ve often toyed with the idea that the NEA should be replaced with a system of arts-funding through earmarks: get rid of the NEA, take the amount it hands out in grants and divide it by 1070 (we still save the bureaucrats’ salaries and benefits, cost of office space and the like), give each congressman and senator two of those shares, one of which has to fund art in his or her district or state, and one of which has to fund the arts outside of his or her state.

It would make arts funding into a serious political issue. Some nitwit funds Maplethorpe or his ilk with his share, if he’s not the congressman whose district includes the Castro, there goes his reelection chances!

It would be fun. It would get art people want to see funded. Though seriously, just abolishing the NEA period would be fine, too.

25
posted on 11/14/2010 5:26:24 PM PST
by The_Reader_David
(And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)

it seems 0Bahbah = Nazi Pelosi = Dirty Reid...& now McConnell.Are they all the same? (they seek corrupting power) ...seems to be.I wish, I hadn't worked for his campaign in '84 @ the Reagan Hdqrs in Lex..

Thirty Years...he was first elected in '84, he "skunked" Dee Huddleson.(sp?) with a Pack of Hunting Hounds, It seems Dee forgot aboutwhom he was representing in Washington D.C.MUCH LIKE (Washington Insider) MITCH IS DOING NOW!

you pretty much nailed it...the money isnt as much of an issue as the ‘payback’ [though when the checking account is empty, every dollar counts]...that and wholesale selling out o the countrys economy by billions, for a couple hundred grand for a community center to buy votes back home...

We have four more years to notch McConnell, Skink, but as you know, he has a permanent place on my $hit list (amnesty). Even Hal Rogers came out against earmarks the other day, but I don’t believe him for a minute. If either one thinks TEA parties are going anywhere in two or four years, they have another think coming.

“Earmarks (pork) have always been bad, especially in the case of Ted Stevens, but John McCain has never earmarked anything. I loath McCain, but I have to give the devil his due on that one.”

Always is a strong word - but regardless, it is the operative word today. Sen. Inhofe, and all other Republicans, may want to make a case for earmarks - and they’re welcome to do it - but, please, NOT THIS SESSION. At least wait until 2013, and then only under VERY STRICT rules, if at all.

33
posted on 11/15/2010 4:41:14 AM PST
by BobL
(The whole point of being human is knowing when the party's over.)

Freepers here on the forum are way to quick to call others RINOs, without really knowing what a RINO is. And just to explain a RINO is someone who votes most of the time with the rats, not occasionally, like when it is a no partisan vote

You are SOOOOOOO right. When people start calling Inhofe a RINO, then I know they’re trolls - or they are so misinformed as to be laughable. Graham yes, Snowe yes, lots of others in the middle (i.e., ACU ~90), Inhofe - no friggen way.

37
posted on 11/15/2010 5:03:24 AM PST
by BobL
(The whole point of being human is knowing when the party's over.)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.